Author
Topic: Western-rite Orthodoxy (Read 66033 times)

I've been meaning to start a thread on this topic for some time. I know that it's been discussed before a bit, but I think the time is ripe to consider once again the questions posed by the emergence of the Western rite in the Orthodox Church.

My own take on it, in a nutshell, is that Orthodoxy should allow for the establishment of Western-rite parishes, should an entire parish wish to convert to Orthodoxy and retain a Western usage. I would say the same thing in terms of an eventual reunion with the West, should that ever come to pass. The Orthodox must allow for some kind of Western liturgy, although probably not the novus ordo as it is now practiced in North American Latin Churches, to be used by the Western Church in this instance.

I think that some Eastern disciplines should clearly apply to Westerners. For example, fasting before communion would have to be the rule. But what about issues like fasting on Wednesdays and Fridays? Perhaps they should just follow Eastern rules whole hog here? Or maybe there should be something of an allowance for divergence in practice, perhaps a return to pre-Vatican II fasting practice for Westerners being prescribed?

I am of the opinion that Western theological emphasis should be permitted and encouraged in Western parishes that are received into Orthodoxy, up to a point. There is clearly a point beyond which one cannot go here. Clearly, any such emphases must be confined to developments occuring in the first millenium of Church history, and even then, some should be viewed with caution. I suppose a hybrid kind of emphasis might be what I would favour, but really with Eastern concepts taking the lead.

Some Western liturigies already in use in the Orthodox world appear to me to be quite suspect, others being more sound. In theory, I have a great deal of difficulty with Anglican usage that is now allowed in some parishes, seeing as the Anglican rite evolved in a very inorganic, non-traditional way: it was basically artificially constructed. The epiclesis inserted in the Anglican rite seems very artificial too: would not a supplices te rogamus prayer be more compatible with Western forms?

Another problem I have with some Western liturgies is that they are actually more primitive in form than Eastern liturgies, and as such, do not have built in to their content the reflection of the historic battes for Orthodoxy that were waged in the early and middle Byzantine period. Also, because of their more primitive nature, Western liturgies are, ironically, less scriptural in content and not nearly as doctrinally explicit.

And yet, having said all this, would it be possible for the Orthodox to allow for a wide variety of non-traditional liturgical use to be brought into play, just so long as the faith was held in common, and trust the Holy Spirit to confirm that which is good in this practice, and to weed out was inappropriate? After all, Orthodoxy has historically taken that which was good in a given culture and sacralized it, making it its own. We shouldn't be out to "Byzantinize" or "Russify" or "Romanianize" people, but to share the treasure of the Orthodox faith with them.

It's true that many Orthodox do not consider Western-rite Orthodoxy to be legitmate at all. As far as I can tell, this is because of a few arguments that are somewhat related. In the first case, some of these liturgies have been mothballed for ages(e.g., the Sarum rite) and are museum pieces, not liturgies that have been allowed to develop naturally. A similar argument against Western liturgical usage would be that it evolved in a schismatic and/or heterodox setting. But I think that under certain conditions, it simply has to be allowed. I would like to hear divergent views on this topic, that I know are out there! My own position is far from fixed on it, and I could change my mind on some issues, should I encounter compelling and convincing arguments. Comments?

I agree with your general statement--that there should be Western Rite Orthodox Churches. Here in Omaha, we are fortunate to have one (part of the Antiochian archdiocese) and sometimes I go there for Vespers and Matins during the week. The prayers and the hymns and the style of chanting (Gregorian) are very gratifying to my Western ears, though, I have come to make the Eastern Rite my preference.

As far as fasting rules go, I know that the Western Rite is not as strict as Eastern Rite. For instance, fasting is pretty much limited to Wednesdays and Fridays even during the Nativity Lent and Great Lent seasons and also the restrictions on what can be consumed is relaxed. The thing I do not want to happen is people becoming Western Orthodox only because they feel they cannot handle the rigidity of the Eastern Fast. There should be more clarification on this.

But for those who are former liturgical Lutherans (like myself) and Episcopalians and RCs, the Western-Rite Orthodox parishes could be a good catalyst to bring them into the one true faith. I know from some of my conversations, that many converts became Western Rite because the mystical nature of the Eastern Rite was foreign to them. So let them have their Western Rite congregations.

James Bob and Scamandrius,What a great topic! I would say, I agree with everything what you wrote. I consider that some people can found Western rite more native for them and the decision of conversion may become much easier. Additionally, the veneration of Western Saints has a lot of indication that good components of thier previous faith are well respected. Especially, that would apply to Roman Catholics. Personally, I agree that existing congregations or significant parts of existing parishes can be accepted as new Western Rite Orthodox parishes. But also it would seem applicble to consider an idea of establishment of a new Western Rite misssion in every major USA city. For example, it has been successfully implemented in Washington, DC by AOA. Being an Eastern Rite cradle from "the Old Country", I visited that mission - St. Gregory the Great - several times and I really enjoyed services. So, I would say for someone, who spent years within Liturgical Lutheran, RC or Episcopalian traditions, an opportunity to visit familiar serivces in the Orthodox Chruch would be even much more beneficial, even if these people consider only Eastern Rite.That issues of new Western mission appears especially important now after new SCOBA decisions regarding coordinated missionary work and during the time of growing disappointment of conservative Episcopalians, caused by certain overly liberal changes. Last, but not least. Exposure to ancient Western Rite Orthodox spirituality to broader Easter Rite audience would enhance thier faith and illustrate more international character of Orthodoxy, which may benefit for example in cases of non-Orthodox spouses conversion to Orthodoxy. Orthodox Church in UK already has done a lot of work in studies of pre-schism Western spirituality.

I agree with your general statement--that there should be Western Rite Orthodox Churches. Here in Omaha, we are fortunate to have one (part of the Antiochian archdiocese) and sometimes I go there for Vespers and Matins during the week. The prayers and the hymns and the style of chanting (Gregorian) are very gratifying to my Western ears, though, I have come to make the Eastern Rite my preference.

Interesting. I've never been able to attend a Western rite service. I would like to some day.

Quote

As far as fasting rules go, I know that the Western Rite is not as strict as Eastern Rite. For instance, fasting is pretty much limited to Wednesdays and Fridays even during the Nativity Lent and Great Lent seasons and also the restrictions on what can be consumed is relaxed. The thing I do not want to happen is people becoming Western Orthodox only because they feel they cannot handle the rigidity of the Eastern Fast. There should be more clarification on this.

I guess you're right. It's possible that this might become a problem. Is the solution to make Eastern fasting practices the rule across the board?

James Bob and Scamandrius,What a great topic! I would say, I agree with everything what you wrote. I consider that some people can found Western rite more native for them and the decision of conversion may become much easier. Additionally, the veneration of Western Saints has a lot of indication that good components of thier previous faith are well respected. Especially, that would apply to Roman Catholics. Personally, I agree that existing congregations or significant parts of existing parishes can be accepted as new Western Rite Orthodox parishes. But also it would seem applicble to consider an idea of establishment of a new Western Rite misssion in every major USA city. For example, it has been successfully implemented in Washington, DC by AOA. Being an Eastern Rite cradle from "the Old Country", I visited that mission - St. Gregory the Great - several times and I really enjoyed services. So, I would say for someone, who spent years within Liturgical Lutheran, RC or Episcopalian traditions, an opportunity to visit familiar serivces in the Orthodox Chruch would be even much more beneficial, even if these people consider only Eastern Rite.That issues of new Western mission appears especially important now after new SCOBA decisions regarding coordinated missionary work and during the time of growing disappointment of conservative Episcopalians, caused by certain overly liberal changes. Last, but not least. Exposure to ancient Western Rite Orthodox spirituality to broader Easter Rite audience would enhance thier faith and illustrate more international character of Orthodoxy, which may benefit for example in cases of non-Orthodox spouses conversion to Orthodoxy. Orthodox Church in UK already has done a lot of work in studies of pre-schism Western spirituality.

Starlight,

You make a pretty convincing case for broadening the acceptance of the Western rite beyond what I think should be allowed. Maybe you are right. I can see how it might make Orthodoxy more appealing to some people, and prove to them that we are not bound to expressions of Orthodoxy that might appear to be tied to just a few cultural expressions of the faith. However, I do worry a bit about Western liturgies not being as doctrinally explicit as Eastern liturgies. I don't dismiss out of hand the arguments of those who like to see the use of the Western rite restricted. I wonder if anyone else has anything to say about this.

However, I do worry a bit about Western liturgies not being as doctrinally explicit as Eastern liturgies. I don't dismiss out of hand the arguments of those who like to see the use of the Western rite restricted. I wonder if anyone else has anything to say about this.

Well, St. Tikhon did look over the Book of Common Prayer and did some things to the liturgy in it. I should think that he knew what he was doing about doctrinal explicitness.

Ebor

Logged

"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

Well, St. Tikhon did look over the Book of Common Prayer and did some things to the liturgy in it. I should think that he knew what he was doing about doctrinal explicitness.

Ebor

Eh, I don't think that your argument necessarily proves the point; he may not have worked on the doctrinal "explicitness" if he didn't think it was necessary, but it doesn't mean that it isn't necessary now, or that it wasn't necessary then.

It would be akin to the argument about the Holy Spirit being "omoousios" in the Creed - why did generations of fathers, and 5 other Ecumenical Councils as well as countless Endemousa Synods and local councils not add it? They felt it wasn't necessary. But one can argue effectively that it belongs in the Creed if the Creed is to be the one-stop, all-inclusive definition of the necessary core of our belief.

So too, the WR liturgy may need to be more "doctrinally explicit" (I don't know - I haven't read it) even though St. Tikhon went over it with a fine-tooth comb; or it may not. If someone wanted to do a textual study here on OC.net of the WR liturgy, then maybe the issues could get hashed out.

Logged

"There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that “my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."" Isaac Asimov

In my city, we have about 30 Orthodox parishes which are all ethnic. The only non-ethnic parish is an OCA one in a neighbouring town 20 minutes away. In the same town, a Western Rite parish is starting up and I've been asked to be a part of it. I see nothing wrong with being part of an Eastern Orthodox parish and a Western Orthodox parish. Actually I think living in North America, it balances it out. I love my greek parish and we do 50/50 english/greek but sometimes you just wanna hear the whole thing in english and thats not bad either. Western Rite services are almost identical to Pre-Vatican II RC services...actually the Tridentine Mass (traditional mass used before the 70's) as it is called has less revisions in it than the byzantine liturgy which kept adding prayers on to it as the centuries passed. Thats why the Western Masses tend to be somewhat shorter. I'm not advocating one over the other. Both Eastern and Western forms are ancient and I have no problem with either form.

I think that some Eastern disciplines should clearly apply to Westerners. For example, fasting before communion would have to be the rule. But what about issues like fasting on Wednesdays and Fridays? Perhaps they should just follow Eastern rules whole hog here? Or maybe there should be something of an allowance for divergence in practice, perhaps a return to pre-Vatican II fasting practice for Westerners being prescribed?

I am of the opinion that Western theological emphasis should be permitted and encouraged in Western parishes that are received into Orthodoxy, up to a point. There is clearly a point beyond which one cannot go here. Clearly, any such emphases must be confined to developments occuring in the first millenium of Church history, and even then, some should be viewed with caution. I suppose a hybrid kind of emphasis might be what I would favour, but really with Eastern concepts taking the lead.

Another problem I have with some Western liturgies is that they are actually more primitive in form than Eastern liturgies, and as such, do not have built in to their content the reflection of the historic battes for Orthodoxy that were waged in the early and middle Byzantine period. Also, because of their more primitive nature, Western liturgies are, ironically, less scriptural in content and not nearly as doctrinally explicit.

After all, Orthodoxy has historically taken that which was good in a given culture and sacralized it, making it its own. We shouldn't be out to "Byzantinize" or "Russify" or "Romanianize" people, but to share the treasure of the Orthodox faith with them.

Pravoslav, fasting before ocmmunion is not solely an Eastern development. Up until 2 decades ago, Catholics had to fast between 3-9 hours before reception of Communion.

Historically, in the West, ppl only fasted on Friday- not the Wednesday.

About it being more primitive, that is part of the beauty of it. We can look at the Byzantine Rite as something as an ongoing development from the 3rd century to the 10th. And we can see the Western liturgy as basically having the same form since the 5th century. Whats wrong with that? A natural development of liturgy is OK, a random reformation of liturgy is NOT (aka Vat. II).

I agree. I'd hate to walk into a western orthodox parish and see tons of icons and no statues for example. Every rite or tradition should stick to its original form, without trying to hybrid with anything else.

Actually I think living in North America, it balances it out. I love my greek parish and we do 50/50 english/greek but sometimes you just wanna hear the whole thing in english and thats not bad either. Western Rite services are almost identical to Pre-Vatican II RC services...actually the Tridentine Mass (traditional mass used before the 70's) as it is called has less revisions in it than the byzantine liturgy which kept adding prayers on to it as the centuries passed. Thats why the Western Masses tend to be somewhat shorter.

(...)

About it being more primitive, that is part of the beauty of it. We can look at the Byzantine Rite as something as an ongoing development from the 3rd century to the 10th. And we can see the Western liturgy as basically having the same form since the 5th century. Whats wrong with that? A natural development of liturgy is OK, a random reformation of liturgy is NOT (aka Vat. II).

Eh, not only oversimplification, but not totally accurate.

Oh, and shorter doesn't necessarily mean more "ancient."

Logged

"There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that “my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."" Isaac Asimov

Well, I guess not totally accurate, in so far as the Roman Canon didn't reach its static form until the early 7th century (having been truncated rather considerably over the previous two centuries). I suppose one could also say that there were some Galician influences after that, and some additions here and there (preparatory prayers, Agnus Dei, addition of the Creed, the Last Gospel, etc.).

It's hard for me to compare the significance of these additions in the Roman Rite to the medieval changes in the Byzantine Rite.

« Last Edit: December 12, 2006, 01:24:36 PM by pensateomnia »

Logged

But for I am a man not textueel I wol noght telle of textes neuer a deel. (Chaucer, The Manciple's Tale, 1.131)

I only mean that with the independence of OCA from Russia, isn't the OCA free to develop its own unique American Tradition?

Pax Vobiscum

I see, Francis-Christopher. What we are talking about here are liturgies that have developed in the West and their Orthodox usage. I think that what you are suggesting will take hold, but it will take place slowly over a period of time. Eventually, there will be something like a North American recension of the Divine Liturgy, but it will still be the liturgies of St.Basil and St. John Chrysostom that are in use.

Well, St. Tikhon did look over the Book of Common Prayer and did some things to the liturgy in it. I should think that he knew what he was doing about doctrinal explicitness.

I have to say, that, in its present form, I find this liturgy somewhat artificial. I think it's kind of weird that there is an epiclesis stuck into it.....which ironically is quite explicit, but that's just it, it seems kind of foreign to the way Western Liturgy developed. If they had used something like the te supplices rogamus prayer from the old Roman canon, would it have been more appropriate? Have you ever participated in one of these liturgies, Ebor or anyone else? If you did, what was your impression?

Well, I've been in lurk mode since... the site went down. It's been really nice, but I love the Western Rite, so I had to come out, if not just to put in my two cents.

I see the epiclesis come up a lot. To a theologian, it's probably a big deal, but to the ordinary person going to worship every Sunday, it doesn't raise any eyebrows. I didn't know it had been added in till I was told in my class for catachumens. And to tell the truth, I'm not 100% sure I know what it is. I gather is is the part where we ask for God to make the Host and Wine into the Body and Blood of Christ instead of just thanking him for doing so? At any rate, I'm going to an OCA parish now- obviously Eastern Rite. I have never been lost, as far as the Divine Liturgy goes. It's about the same thing, but it goes more into detail on the petitions and it repeats itself at times. The customs are what are different, like 50% water and 50% wine in the chalice, and blessed wine with the blessed bread, or that the rubrics call for warm water. I also like that as you're serving you can hide behind the iconostasis; plus my parish closes the doors and pulls the curtain when it can. Oh, and only crossing behind the altar, that is a new one. It is easier too, because my priest is also and ex-Episcopalian, so he understands where some of my questions come from, such as, "What candle do I light first?" when I was asked to light the candles.To respond to the earlyer post: no, the Western Rite will not be taking on Eastern fasting rules. A Rite includes more than the Mass. It is the way the life of the church is carried out. I'll admit to you, I've been bad. I've been keeping up my western practices at home, even though I probably wont get back to the WR for a very long time... but that is another thread. It is good to fast, for the right reasons, but WR fasting and abstinance (the WR makes a distinction) is just as effective.

I have to say, that, in its present form, I find this liturgy somewhat artificial. I think it's kind of weird that there is an epiclesis stuck into it.....which ironically is quite explicit, but that's just it, it seems kind of foreign to the way Western Liturgy developed. If they had used something like the te supplices rogamus prayer from the old Roman canon, would it have been more appropriate? Have you ever participated in one of these liturgies, Ebor or anyone else? If you did, what was your impression?

I have been to the Liturgy of St. Tikhon a couple of times. It was nice and everything, but overall it seemed unnatural. About a third seemed like they belonged in a Latin Mass or SSPX church (50's clothing and stuff), the other third seemed like the stereotypical well to do, well dressed Episcopalian, with the other third being a hodge poge. It was a pretty Church and felt like a traditional Latin or Anglican Church with a lot more icons (I don't recall any statues). The priest seemed genuine and there was an Orthodox mindset in the clergy. That said, the liturgy seemed confused. I felt like I was attending a nice Anglican service with a lot more Lord Have mercies and as you said the eclipses which really did stick out like a sore thumb. Futhermore, there seemed to be a general confusion as some people made the sign of the cross with five fingers some with three, some left to right, and some right to left. Again, I'm not saying differences are a bad thing in themselves, but from the Liturgy and the actions sometimes I felt as though I were attending a really watered down Orthodox service with kneeling, or a really nice Anglican Rite Service. It seemed unable to express itself completly and independently. Perhaps time will allow a change in this. So, I have mixed feelings.

I genuinly hope that a western rite can be found, but from my experience with the Liturgy of St. Tikhon, I don't think this is it. Does anyone know how much the Antiochian head is involved with nurturing the western-rite?

Logged

"If you give the average Frenchman a choice between a reforming president who would plug the country's huge deficit and a good cheese, he would probably opt for the cheese." - Stephen ClarkeI think the French may be on to something here.

I got the same impression that pravoslavbob did - that the response thus far to this thread has been a generally positive attitude. That, it seems to me, is a bit of a watershed and I am happy to see it.

In the past there have been some pretty strong, WR-bashing posts.

I'd like to visit a WR service some time; but I doubt I could ever leave the ER now after 4 years (since the first time I wondered in on a liturgy on a snowy Sunday morning).

I belong to a Western rite parish that uses the Rite of St. Gregory, but we used to use the Rite of St. Tikhon several years ago, so I have some experience of both. The epiclesis in the Rite of St. Tikhon was not so much an insertion into but rather a strengthening of an Anglican text. The 1928 American Book of Common Prayer upon which St. Tikhon is based contains a rudimentary epiclesis (the "Invocation"), but it was reworded to be a more explicit Orthodox epiclesis. Compare the following excerpts from the 1928 BCP and St. Tikhon:

1928 BCP:

And we most humbly beseech thee, O merciful Father, to hear us; and, of thy almighty goodness, vouchsafe to bless and sanctify, with thy Word and Holy Spirit, these thy gifts and creatures of bread and wine; that we, receiving them according to thy Son our Saviour Jesus ChristÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s holy institution, in remembrance of his death and passion, may be partakers of his most blessed Body and Blood.

St. Tikhon:

And we most humbly beseech thee, O merciful Father, to hear us; and, of thy almighty goodness, vouchsafe to send down thy Holy Spirit upon these thy gifts and creatures of bread and wine, that they may be changed into the Body and Blood of thy most dearly beloved Son. Grant that we, receiving them according to thy Son our Saviour Jesus ChristÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s holy institution, in remembrance of his death and passion, may be partakers of his most blessed Body and Blood. R. AMEN. AMEN. AMEN.

It is in the Rite of St. Gregory that an epiclesis was inserted, as the Roman Canon lacks one. Here is the epiclesis in St. Gregory, located between the Supra quae propitio and the Supplices te rogamus:

And we beseech thee, O Lord, to send down thy Holy Spirit upon these offerings, that he would make this bread the precious Body of thy Christ, and that which is in this Cup the precious Blood of thy Son our Lord Jesus Christ, transmuting them by thy Holy Spirit. R. AMEN. AMEN. AMEN.

It is in the Rite of St. Gregory that an epiclesis was inserted, as the Roman Canon lacks one. Here is the epiclesis in St. Gregory, located between the Supra quae propitio and the Supplices te rogamus:

And we beseech thee, O Lord, to send down thy Holy Spirit upon these offerings, that he would make this bread the precious Body of thy Christ, and that which is in this Cup the precious Blood of thy Son our Lord Jesus Christ, transmuting them by thy Holy Spirit. R. AMEN. AMEN. AMEN.

James,

Good to see someone from a Western rite parish posting here!

This is puzzling to me. Since many Orthodox view the supplices te rogamus as an equivalent to the epiclesis, wouldn't the epiclesis be viewed as being superfluous in this instance?

BTW, does your parish have a website with pics? I'd like to see them. If you don't want to share with everyone here, perhaps you could PM me?

The only one in N.America for sure is in Rhode Island. I've never been there, but I have longed to go so will try visit probably in March. Then, I shall dig up this by then dead thread and report. However, I haven't been to any Sarum Liturgy in any Jursidiction, but I'd hope to go and I hope it'll be more preferable than I found the Liturgy of St. Tikhon. From reading it, I really don't see any objection that sticks out and as I've said, I do think the western rite would be good if you could work out the kinks. I know when I was a catechumine one of the hardest things was leaving the western rite that I grew up with.I believe ROCOR has another Monastery in Austrialia, St Petros, and I believe both monasteries are attached. As far as I know, there are no actual parishes that are western rite, although, I believe that have oblates or a third order. I also believe we have a ROCOR poster here from England and I think he is invovled in the western rite. I'll try to think of his name and maybe he can weigh in.

Logged

"If you give the average Frenchman a choice between a reforming president who would plug the country's huge deficit and a good cheese, he would probably opt for the cheese." - Stephen ClarkeI think the French may be on to something here.

The only one in N.America for sure is in Rhode Island. I've never been there, but I have longed to go so will try visit probably in March. Then, I shall dig up this by then dead thread and report. I also believe we have a ROCOR poster here from England and I think he is invovled in the western rite. I'll try to think of his name and maybe he can weigh in.

"If you give the average Frenchman a choice between a reforming president who would plug the country's huge deficit and a good cheese, he would probably opt for the cheese." - Stephen ClarkeI think the French may be on to something here.

If Fort Worth is in Texas, then I've been there last year and I have to say the ppl there are very friendly.

Yes, they're very friendly.

Logged

"If you give the average Frenchman a choice between a reforming president who would plug the country's huge deficit and a good cheese, he would probably opt for the cheese." - Stephen ClarkeI think the French may be on to something here.

My question is what is wrong with Eastern-rite Orthodoxy? I understand, and feel an urgent need for a unified American Orthodox Church in which our liturgies are done in English. The Orthodox Church would become much more approachable if we put down a language barrier. But the idea of compromising Orthodox Tradition to make it more American compatable should not be considered.

Many former Epsicopalians have fully embraced the Liturgy of St Tikon as it makes them feel at home with the service. To them it does not seem contrived but the continuation of their rite they are deeply attached to. Most people from the Roman Catholic backgrounds prefer the Liturgy of St Gregory .

The Sarum Rite tends to be appealing to Liturgists and people who wish to see a historical service, however it is not a currently active service that has continuity and seems to be more of a museum piece with no continuation through the ages past to the present time. The Milan jurisdicton in Austin uses this rite in Austin.

Many former Epsicopalians have fully embraced the Liturgy of St Tikon as it makes them feel at home with the service. To them it does not seem contrived but the continuation of their rite they are deeply attached to. Most people from the Roman Catholic backgrounds prefwere the Liturgy of St Gregory .

Well if they want Episcopalian services, may I recommend an Episcopalian Church? And if they want Catholic services, may I recommend the a Catholic Church? If, however, they want services in line with the Traditions of the Empire, I would recommend an Orthodox Church.

Quote

The Sarum Rite tends to be appealing to Liturgists and people who wish to see a historical service, however it is not a currently active service that has continuity and seems to be more of a museum piece with no continuation through the ages past to the present time. The Milan jurisdicton in Austin uses this rite in Austin.

In the context of Orthodoxy the liturgy of St. Tikon and the liturgy of St. Gregory are no different. Furthermore, not only are their roots museum pieces to us, but their existance within the Orthodox Church is a foreign imposition.

Well if they want Episcopalian services, may I recommend an Episcopalian Church? And if they want Catholic services, may I recommend the a Catholic Church? If, however, they want services in line with the Traditions of the Empire, I would recommend an Orthodox Church.

You know, they could actually be after Truth, rather than "services in line with the Traditions of the Empire." Not everyone converts because they like Slavic culture or Byzantine chant.

Logged

Artillery adds dignity to what would otherwise be a vulgar brawl. ~Frederick the Great

Well if they want Episcopalian services, may I recommend an Episcopalian Church? And if they want Catholic services, may I recommend the a Catholic Church? If, however, they want services in line with the Traditions of the Empire, I would recommend an Orthodox Church.

He is right- if we as Orthodox believe that we are the True Church, why should we implement elements of denominations that have fallen away from the Church? However, greekischristian, be careful of calling the Holy Orthodox Church, and the Tradition therein, the Traditions of the Empire. That could lead to a lot of confusion and misunderstanding about the nature of Tradition in the Orthodox Church.

However, greekischristian, be careful of calling the Holy Orthodox Church, and the Tradition therein, the Traditions of the Empire. That could lead to a lot of confusion and misunderstanding about the nature of Tradition in the Orthodox Church.

Yes it could lead to such confusion and misunderstanding...and that's half the fun

It's not half the fun when dealing with people who are already misled about the teachings of Orthodoxy. A lot of the protestant argument against Orhtodoxy has to do with their idea that the emperor had too much to do with the Church.

Quite true, but perhaps if we can get them on a theologically-correct path, they'll find their way home to the Divine Liturgy.

Certainly. That is the hope for anyone who is looking to bring people to Orthodoxy. However I don't feel the need to compromise any aspect of the Orthodox Liturgy. I've been to a few protestant and non-demoninatiol services and I find so much lacking, that there really is nothing of substance to bring into the Orthodox Liturgy from outside.

Certainly. That is the hope for anyone who is looking to bring people to Orthodoxy. However I don't feel the need to compromise any aspect of the Orthodox Liturgy. I've been to a few protestant and non-demoninatiol services and I find so much lacking, that there really is nothing of substance to bring into the Orthodox Liturgy from outside.

Using non-denominational services to argue against using Western liturgical formats is like comparing apples and screwdrivers. They're so far apart there's no basis of comparison or critique. There may be good and legitimate arguments against allowing Anglican and Roman-based Western rites, but none of those arguments involve concerns about non-denominational services. At least the criticisms of the Sarum-based rites being museum pieces have some legitimate basis in reality.

Logged

Artillery adds dignity to what would otherwise be a vulgar brawl. ~Frederick the Great

I don't know if you are seeing my point. My concern, and the concern of other is the allowing of any outside influence on Orthodoxy. I know there is a big different between high protestant sects and non-denominational services, but regardless I feel that there is nothing that needs to be brought into Orthodoxy from either of these sides.

I don't know if you are seeing my point. My concern, and the concern of other is the allowing of any outside influence on Orthodoxy. I know there is a big different between high protestant sects and non-denominational services, but regardless I feel that there is nothing that needs to be brought into Orthodoxy from either of these sides.

If you plan to apply your argument consistently, then you also need to state that all of those old pagan customs that the Church baptized and brought into Orthodoxy also shouldn't have been brought in. After all, if an Anglican or Roman liturgy that grew out of Orthodox roots is unbaptizable and must remain forever outside of Orthodoxy, how much more so must that apply to once-pagan customs that the Church redeemed. I'll let you be the one to tell the Serbs that slava shouldn't have ever been brought into the Church, however.

Logged

Artillery adds dignity to what would otherwise be a vulgar brawl. ~Frederick the Great

But we already have a liturgy, and a very nice one at that. Furthermore, these liturgies are not the customs of culture that has converted to Orthodxy, they are customs of a culture that is foreign to Orthodoxy. And we have no need of the imposition of foreign cultures on our Church.